The Slop Problem
The internet is filling up with AI-generated content. Articles, images, code, comments—all of it produced at scale by models trained on human-created work. Some of this AI content is good. Much of it is mediocre. A concerning amount of it is wrong. And all of it is trivially easy to produce.
We’ve started calling this phenomenon “slop”—low-quality content that’s cheap to generate and that gradually clutters the information ecosystem. It’s not malicious, exactly. It’s just… noise. Content that exists because it costs almost nothing to create, not because anyone particularly needed it.
Why This Should Worry You
When AI agents retrieve information to make decisions, they increasingly encounter slop. This creates a troubling feedback loop that gets worse over time.
It works like this: AI generates low-quality content. That content gets indexed and becomes part of the corpus that other AIs draw from. Those AIs use the low-quality content as training data or context for their own outputs. The resulting outputs are a bit worse than they would have been otherwise. Quality degrades. And gradually, trust in AI-generated content erodes—deservedly so.
This is particularly dangerous for enterprise AI systems that need to be reliable. If your AI agent is making decisions based on information it retrieved from the web, and an increasing percentage of that information is slop, your agent’s decisions will gradually become less trustworthy. You might not even notice until something goes meaningfully wrong.
Solutions That Sound Good but Don’t Work
Several commonly proposed solutions to the slop problem fail in practice.
Better prompts don’t solve it. Yes, better prompts produce better individual outputs. But they don’t address the systemic accumulation of low-quality content in the broader information ecosystem. Your agent might produce clean outputs, but if it’s pulling context from a polluted web, the pollution leaks through.
Fine-tuning helps but doesn’t scale. You can fine-tune your models to avoid producing slop, but the slop keeps proliferating around you. You’d need to continuously update your training data to keep up with the degrading information environment. That’s a treadmill with no end.
Watermarking AI content addresses attribution, not quality. Knowing that something was AI-generated tells you nothing about whether it’s accurate or valuable. And watermarks can be stripped or circumvented anyway.
Human review works at small scale but becomes the bottleneck. If you’re trying to use AI to handle high volumes of content or decisions, routing everything through human review defeats the purpose. You’ve just recreated the manual process with extra steps.
What Actually Works
The organizations successfully navigating this problem share several approaches.
Source quality control is the foundation. They carefully curate the information sources their agents can access. They whitelist high-quality, trusted sources. They blacklist sources that consistently produce low-quality or unreliable information. This is labor-intensive work upfront—someone has to evaluate sources and maintain the list—but it pays off in dramatically more reliable agent outputs.
Verification loops catch errors before they propagate. Instead of having agents act immediately on retrieved information, successful organizations build in verification steps. An agent retrieves some data, checks it against a second source, confirms the information is consistent, and only then proceeds. Cross-referencing claims before acting on them adds latency but dramatically reduces errors.
Output quality metrics create feedback signals. If you’re not measuring the quality of what your agents produce, you have no way to know when things are getting worse. Successful organizations measure agent output quality continuously and investigate when metrics trend downward. A customer service agent might be rated on resolution quality, not just speed. A research agent might be evaluated on accuracy of citations.
Human-in-the-loop for novelty keeps humans involved where they add the most value. Agents handle routine cases—the situations they’ve seen before, where the patterns are well-established. Novel situations, edge cases, and high-stakes decisions get routed to humans. This preserves the efficiency gains from AI while maintaining a human backstop for the cases most likely to go wrong.
How We Think About This
At Agents Squads, fighting slop is a core part of how we design systems.
We build curated knowledge bases rather than letting agents pull from the open web. Every information source is evaluated and approved before agents can access it. This takes more work upfront but produces dramatically more reliable outputs.
We require multi-step verification for consequential decisions. Before an agent takes an action that’s hard to reverse, it needs to confirm its reasoning through multiple information channels. If the channels disagree, a human gets involved.
We measure output quality continuously and investigate any degradation immediately. Metrics are our early warning system for when things start to drift.
We track provenance obsessively. For any piece of information an agent uses, we can trace back to where it came from. This makes debugging possible and helps identify which sources are reliable over time.
The Larger Context
The slop problem is really a symptom of something deeper: an optimization for production speed over production quality.
When AI makes content generation nearly free, the temptation is to generate as much as possible. More content, more often, everywhere. But volume without quality is worse than useless—it actively degrades the information environment for everyone, including the AI systems that will train on tomorrow’s web.
As AI makes content generation easier, quality becomes the real differentiator. Organizations that maintain high standards will stand out precisely because most won’t bother. This requires investment in quality control systems, which costs money. It requires a cultural commitment to accuracy over volume, which is hard when competitors are flooding the zone with content. It requires technical infrastructure for verification, which takes engineering effort to build. And it requires willingness to say “no” to low-quality outputs, which means accepting that some content won’t ship.
What You Can Do
The slop problem won’t solve itself. It requires deliberate effort from everyone building or using AI systems.
First, acknowledge that quality is degrading. Don’t assume AI outputs are reliable just because they sound confident. Build systems that verify rather than trust blindly.
Second, invest in verification infrastructure. The organizations that build robust systems for checking AI outputs will have a significant advantage over those that don’t.
Third, maintain standards even when it’s inconvenient. Don’t sacrifice quality for speed. A smaller volume of high-quality output is more valuable than a larger volume of unreliable content.
Fourth, share what works. The slop problem affects everyone building AI systems. When you find approaches that work, share them. When you find approaches that fail, share those too.
We’re actively building tools and practices to maintain quality in AI systems. If you’re tackling this problem, we’d love to compare notes: quality@agents-squads.com
From Theory to Practice
Our engineering team tackles slop with practical solutions:
- Context Optimization — Managing token efficiency to reduce noise
- Memory Systems — Building reliable state for consistent outputs
- Squads Architecture — Domain-organized agents with clear accountability
Get Intelligence Reports
How are enterprises fighting AI quality degradation? Our Intelligence Reports cover evaluation frameworks, quality metrics, and implementation strategies.
Further Reading:
